On constitutive formalities, estoppel and breaking the rules
| dc.contributor.author | Myburgh, Franziska | en_ZA |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2018-09-28T09:58:04Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2018-09-28T09:58:04Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2016-08 | |
| dc.description | CITATION: Myburgh, F. 2016. On constitutive formalities, estoppel and breaking the rules. Stellenbosch Law Review, 27(2):254-272. | en_ZA |
| dc.description | The original publication is available at https://journals.co.za/content/journal/jlc_slr | en_ZA |
| dc.description.abstract | This article focuses on the general rule in South African law that a successful reliance on estoppel should not result in the enforcement of an agreement prohibited by law.1 More particularly, it considers the application of the rule in the context of formally defective sales of land and suretyships, where section 2(1) of the Alienation of Land Act 68 of 1981 and section 6 of General Law Amendment Act 50 of 1956 respectively prescribe nullity in the event of formal non-compliance. The contention is that the blanket exclusion of estoppel here should be reconsidered. | en_ZA |
| dc.description.version | Publishers version | en_ZA |
| dc.identifier.citation | Myburgh, F. 2016. On constitutive formalities, estoppel and breaking the rules. Stellenbosch Law Review, 27(2):254-272. | en_ZA |
| dc.identifier.issn | 1996-2193 (online) | |
| dc.identifier.issn | 1016-4359 (print) | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10019.1/104534 | |
| dc.language.iso | en_ZA | en_ZA |
| dc.publisher | Juta Law | en_ZA |
| dc.rights.holder | Juta Law | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Estoppel | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Transfer (Law) -- South Africa | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Land titles -- Registration and transfer -- South Africa | en_ZA |
| dc.title | On constitutive formalities, estoppel and breaking the rules | en_ZA |
| dc.type | Article | en_ZA |